Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition Radeon R7 250X
Red Dead Redemption 2 1090% 312%
Halo: Reach 278% 31%
Cyberpunk 2077 1535% 465%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1090% 312%
Doom Eternal 923% 254%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 1535% 465%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1719% 529%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 634% 154%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 1535% 465%
Need For Speed Heat 1090% 312%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R7 250X are massively better than the Nvidia GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition.

The Radeon R7 250X has a 400 MHz higher core clock speed but 8 fewer Texture Mapping Units than the 9600 GSO. The lower TMU count doesn't matter, though, as altogether the Radeon R7 250X manages to provide 11.6 GTexel/s better texturing performance. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The Radeon R7 250X has a 400 MHz higher core clock speed and 4 more Render Output Units than the 9600 GSO. This results in the Radeon R7 250X providing 8.6 GPixel/s better pixeling performance. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The Radeon R7 250X was released over three years more recently than the 9600 GSO, and so the Radeon R7 250X is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the 9600 GSO when running the latest games.

The Radeon R7 250X has 1280 MB more video memory than the 9600 GSO, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the Radeon R7 250X also has superior memory performance overall.

The Radeon R7 250X has 33.6 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the 9600 GSO, which means that the memory performance of the Radeon R7 250X is noticeably better than the 9600 GSO.

The GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition has 96 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon R7 250X has 640. However, the actual shader performance of the 9600 GSO is 132 and the actual shader performance of the Radeon R7 250X is 517. The Radeon R7 250X having 385 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the Radeon R7 250X delivers a significantly smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the 9600 GSO.

The Radeon R7 250X transistor size technology is 37 nm (nanometers) smaller than the 9600 GSO. This means that the Radeon R7 250X is expected to run much cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the 9600 GSO.

The GeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition requires 84 Watts to run and the Radeon R7 250X requires 80 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the 9600 GSO and a PSU with at least 450 Watts for the Radeon R7 250X. The 9600 GSO requires 4 Watts more than the Radeon R7 250X to run. The difference is not significant enough for the 9600 GSO to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the Radeon R7 250X.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed550 MHzvs950 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureG92GCN 1.0 Cape Verde XT
OC Potential Poor vs Fair
Driver Support - vs Good
Release Date01 May 2008vs10 Feb 2014
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768 - vs green tick
8.8
1600x900 - vs green tick
6.6
1920x1080 - vs green tick
5.1
2560x1440 - vs green tick
3.4
3840x2160 - vs green tick
2.2

GPU Memory

Memory768 MBvs2048 MB
Memory Speed800 MHzvs1125 MHz
Memory Bus192 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR3vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth38.4GB/secvs72GB/sec
L2 Cache 0 KB vs green tick 512 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units96vs640
Actual Shader Performance6%vs25%
Technology65nmvs28nm
Texture Mapping Units48vs40
Texture Rate26.4 GTexel/svs38 GTexel/s
Render Output Units12vs16
Pixel Rate6.6 GPixel/svs15.2 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs4096x2160
VGA Connections0vs0
DVI Connections2vs1
HDMI Connections0vs1
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power84 Wattsvs80 Watts
Recommended PSU400 Watts & 26 Ampsvs450 Watts & 20 Amps

GPU Features

DirectX10vs12.0
Shader Model4.0vs5.0
Open GL2.1vs4.4
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfirenovsyes
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0GHzvsIntel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz
Recommended RAM4 GBvs8 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1366x768vs1600x900

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewGeForce 9600 GSO EVGA Dual-Slot 768MB Edition is a special edition of the middle-class GeForce 9600 GSO.
It offers twice as much video memory which will only offer a performance boost on superior resolutions which the card isn't very suited for from the begining. Nevertheless, expect an overall 7% performance boost over the reference 384MB card.
Radeon R7 250X is a fast-middle-class Graphics Card based on the Graphics Core Next architecture. It offers the Cape Verde XT GPU.
The Cape Verde XT Core is a GCN 1.1 GPU and was first seen on Radeon HD 7770 and then re-used in the OEM only Radeon HD 8760.
It offers 640 Shader Processing Units, 40 TMUs and 16 ROPs, on a 128-bits memory interface of fast GDDR5.
Radeon R7 250X comes clocked at 950MHz (though there might be some 1GHz versions) and has its operating memory clock set at 1125MHz. The rated TDP board is of 80W and the release price around $99.
This card should come in 1GB and 2GB versions, though both will offer the same performance.
Its performance has proven to be exactly like Radeon HD 7770 GHz Edition (if clocked at 1GHz) and thus this card is not suited for 1080p gaming but it can handle 720p with ease. The 950MHz versions will be around 3% slower.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
GPU Variants
-

Title

Body